Search the Community

Dug up in Maryland.

Collected this oyster? in Maryland, Prince Georges county, I believe it was in the Aquia Formation.

While out hiking in Maryland I came across an interesting stone. I have very limited knowledge of geology or paleontology but it seemed to me that there were numerous prints on this stone. it looked like an ancient mud puddle where animals, including birds, had walked across in different directions leaving paw prints. The pads, toes and sometimes claw marks are visible. One print resembles a human footprint with four small toes and one large toe. With my limited research this should be from the Mauch Chunk formation or the Pottsville Formation, in which case they should not have preserved mammal footprints. I had only my cell phone so my pics are not great. What do you think, are these simply natural marks from weathering or something else?

I had been itching hard to be on the beach, so I slipped away to the bay Saturday and Sunday after Thanksgiving to find some fossils along the Calvert cliffs. I really want to beat my personal best megalodon tooth from Calvert which measures at 4” on the dot; I know that will be difficult so I’m really trying to go more often. (Spoiler: I don’t find my record breaker) Day 1: I really didn’t have time to go out on Saturday but I figured I could delay my responsibilities for a little and fight the wind to spend at max two hours on the beach. I arrived on the beach about 20min before sunrise and started searching with my flashlight and quickly found a nice little megalodon, a little beat up but hey, a meg is a meg. I continued on and found a heart breaker cetacean tooth, the crown much larger than most cetacean teeth I find here, but alas the crown was missing a chunk and the root spit in half and hollow. Before starting my walk back I found a handful of usual teeth from this beach, a few hemipristis and physogaleus and a thumb nail size posterior meg. As I get back to the beginning stretch of beach that I first searched with my flashlight, I found a beautiful epiphysis disk with a 1.8” diameter sitting right next to a 1.9” megalodon . Leaving the beach just over two hours of walking I got a surprising haul, definitely worth the trip. Day 2: I had more time to hit the beach on Sunday, so accompanied with my girlfriend we launched our kayaks for sunrise then landed to begin our search. Same as the day prior the waves were hitting the beach rapidly and the water was murky making it pretty impossible to search beneath the water, so most of our finds were right at the edge of the shell line or high up on the beach. We started by each finding a few large hemipristis teeth all measuring around 1.4” and a couple nice hastalis. My girlfriend found her second megalodon tooth measuring 1.5”, it was a bit beat up but for her second meg she was thrilled. I don’t often go out back to back and I remember why, I’m exhausted. None the less I’d do it again in a heartbeat if I got the time and the weather and tides want to cooperate. It was a great two trips even though I didn’t break my record, but that day will come! Thanks for reading y’all!

Let me start this off with I’m not looking for anyone’s hotspots or honey holes. I’d like to get out to hopefully find some fossil fern plants. Are there any parks in central to southern Maryland that have the possibility to produce any results in that general area. I know that studying and finding unique areas are part of the hobby, but I’m kind of crunched for time. My girlfriend loves the outdoors and hiking through the woods to look at all the variety of plant life that it offers. She thinks that my fossil collecting is cool and interesting, but she just isn’t into the fossils that come from animals. I’d like to find her some fossils that she would enjoy for a Christmas present. It would be greatly appreciated if there’s anyone that point me to a place where I can find her the perfect gift. I’m even going to throw in a pretty please and drop to my knees to throw in a little begging.

With the surprisingly warm weather early last week, I could not resist heading out for what is likely to be the last hunt of the season. Although I did not have the greatest luck on my last trip, I decided to hit the new Severn spot once again - and I couldn't be happier that I did! Upon arriving I was greeted by the open expanse of weathered marl, reminiscent of the western badlands despite the bustling city only a few miles away. Chunks of orange ironstone stood out against the dark Severn matrix and abundant Exogyra costata oysters littered the ground. The Exogyra often occur in small clusters, presumably what would have been oyster beds at the bottom of the shallow Cretaceous sea. A couple of poorly preserved Exogyra weathering out of the marl. Although I had collected a nice handful of Exogyra on my adventure at the site, I could not resist slipping another into the rucksack . The single Exogyra costata specimen collected on this trip. Although it is only a partial specimen, the bottom valve had a particularly interesting appearance. I wandered across the weathered slopes, keeping my eye out for my vertebrate quarry. Due to the poorly preserved nature of the fossils found at this site, I had an exceptionally difficult time differentiating fossils from suggestively shaped rocks. After the first hour, I had only collected about one piece that I felt was a fossil. Although the vertebrate remains remained elusive, I chanced upon an unexpected fossil - a nice chunk of lignite. The marl was rather rich in lignite, with carbonized remains of ancient plants appearing rather frequently. However, these tended to be highly fragmentary and would disintegrate at the slightest disturbance. A nice chunk of lignite that popped right out of the matrix. The lignite, indicative of a nearshore environment, hints at the exciting possibility of finding the remains of certain terrestrial Mesozoic reptiles in the Severn marls... After finding the chunk of lignite, the finds slowed once again. The misshapen ironstone concretions were certainly making their best bone impressions! . While investigating a cluster of Exogyra, I happened upon my first vertebrate fossil of the trip. A nice-sized shark tooth of a similar size to that recovered on my last trip. Based on responses to my last post, I am unsure if it would be appropriate to label this tooth as Scapanorhynchus sp. Any insight would be appreciated . Following the discovery of the first shark tooth, my eyes quickly began gravitating to the suddenly abundant fossils that littered the ground. It was not long before I had gathered a small sampling of surface-collected Severn shark teeth. A few more shark teeth found shortly after I happened upon the first. Unfortunately, the teeth are very poorly preserved and some smaller, brittle teeth disintegrated under the slightest pressure. A few of the smaller shark teeth. The poor preservation combined with the weathered condition of these teeth renders them almost unrecognizable. The shark tooth haul of the day. Along with the shark teeth, numerous white bone fragments littered the matrix. Although these initial seemed quite similar to the concretions and pebbles that lay alongside them, I gradually began to develop an eye for bone. Like the shark teeth, the bones were coated in a white, crusty covering and many were extremely fragile from constant weathering. A handful of fish vertebrae and some miscellaneous bone fragments. Some chunkosaurus, possibly from marine turtles or mosasaurs. The largest bone fragment of the day. This is likely too fragmentary to be identified, though I would be curious to see if any members have suggestions. A view from the end of the bone. What I have tentatively identified as a fish jaw section, possibly from a fish similar to Enchodus. Another intriguing bone fragment. After having spent several hours at the site, I was far more successful than I had been on the last trip. With my eyes attuned to the preservation of the fossils, I decided to give the place I had started at another try. I happened upon several bone fragments before my eyes landed on the last thing I expected to see weathering out of the steep slope... ...a large mosasaur vertebra! The processes were missing and it was badly weathered, but it was a season-maker. In my excitement, I forgot to take in-situ pictures, though it seemed to be little more than another concretion before I picked it up. The vertebra is quite busted up from being exposed to the elements, though some consolidation should help preserve it. Owing to its poor preservation, I do not know if an identification would be possible. In case there is a chance of ID, my understanding is that the three main species of mosasaur recognized from the Severn are Halisaurus platyspondylus, Mosasaurus condon, and Mosasaurus maximus. The vertebra seems to bear a resemblance to that of M. maximus, though the condition makes it very difficult to tell. Overcoming the initial excitement of the discovery, I had to wonder how many times I had walked over the vertebra... and what else I may have overlooked. Thanks for stopping by and happy hunting!

Between 2020-23, two collectors who scuba dive for fossils throughout Florida and Georgia have recovered 5 chesapecten (including two paired valves) with morphological characteristics that signal a Miocene age. These characteristics include an acute byssal notch and a byssal fasciole that is strongly differentiated from the shell’s auricle in terms of sculpture and elevation. The largest of the adult shells also displays an active ctenolium. Additionally, one of the paired specimens displays significant gapes between valves when matched (the other pair was preserved as found by glue according to the collector and cannot be matched). These aforementioned traits are also emblatic of Miocene age for Chesapecten. These shells were recovered from the following areas in Georgia and Florida: Savannah River, Effingham County, Georgia (Collector 1) Specimen 1 (W = 108.0 mm) R valve L valve R valve - close up of byssal notch and fasciole (most of fasciole has been degraded) R valve - close up of ornamentation L valve - close up of ornamentation Profile Close up of matrix, gray sand Savannah River, Effingham County, Georgia (Collector 1) Specimen 2 (W = 101.6 mm) R valve R valve - interior R valve - close up of byssal notch and fasciole L valve - note barnacles are modern species, not fossilized L valve - interior L valve - close up of ornamentation on auricle Side profile of pair, showing gapes Front profile of pair, showing gapes Cumberland Island, Camden County Georgia (Collector 2) Specimen 3 (W = 114.3 mm) R valve, note encrustation is recent not fossilized R valve interior, thick shell apparent Close up of byssal notch and fasciole Close up of ctenolium, although modern encrustation makes it difficult to see what is going on in the ctenolium Close up of ornamentation St Mary’s River, Nassau County, Florida (Collector 2) Specimen 4 (W = 117.5 mm) R Valve R valve interior, active ctenolium and thick shell apparent Byssal notch and fasciole Close up of original sediment, note the olive and gray coloration Profile Suwanee River, Hamilton County, Florida (Collector 2) Specimen 5 (W = 69.9 mm) R valve, subadult specimen R valve interior, shell is thick for a subadult Unfortunately, stratigraphic data were not collected for these shells. However, among the Miocene strata from Coastal Georgia and NE Florida currently described in the literature, the Ebenezer Formation of Weems and Edwards (2001), of Upper Miocene (Tortonian age), appears to be the most suitable match based on the age of the Ebenezer and the characteristics of the shells found. The shells collected resemble Chesapecten middlesexensis of the Upper Miocene of Virginia and North Carolina. The Ebenezer was originally defined by Huddleston (1988) as a member of the Coosawhatchie Formation (Middle Miocene). Weems and Edwards later elevated it to formational rank based on differences in lithological and dinoflagellate composition compared to the rest of the Coosawhatchie. The Ebenezer formation consists of gray to olive-gray, fine- to medium-grained micaceous sand and stretches from South Carolina to NE Florida. Five mappable members are apparent and separable by distinct unconformities. The lower four members correspond to dinoflagellate zone DN 8, while the uppermost member corresponds to DN 9. Revision of the Ebenezer to Formational Rank from Weems and Edwards (2001) According to the dinoflagellate zonation of de Verteuil and Norris (1996), DN 8-9 aligns with the Little Cove Point Member (DN 8) and the Windmill Point Member (DN 9) of the St Mary’s Formation of Maryland and Virginia. Alignment of the Ebenezer to St Mary's Formation of MD and VA from Weems, Self-Trail and Edwards (2004) All specimens display similar characteristics which include an acute byssal notch, differentiated byssal fasciole, slightly inflated right valve, and a hinge size in adult specimens that is relatively small for adult chesapecten with the exception of Chesapecten covepointensis (DN 8 St Mary’s Formation) and in some cases Chesapecten santamaria (DN 9 St Mary’s Formation). Also, these shells could possibly be divided into two distinct variants although issues with preservation which appears to be somewhat better outside the Savannah River region may exaggerate these differences. Nevertheless, the Chesapecten collected outside of the Savannah River Region exhibit stronger, more raised ribs and have thicker, heavier shells compared to the specimens collected within the Savannah River region whose shells are thinner and ribs are lower and less pronounced. This is especially true of Specimen 1. Possibly that these variants originate from different members of the Ebenezer Formation. According to Weems and Edwards, “outside of the Savannah region, beds no older than dinoflagellate zone DN 9 occur”. This suggests that the shells collected outside of the Savannah River Region likely belong to Bed 5 of the Ebenezer Formation. Figure 3 of Weems and Edwards (2001) [shown below] suggests that someone scuba diving for fossils in the Savannah River is likely to collect in Bed 4. Therefore, it is possible that the Chesapecten specimens recovered from the Savannah River belong to Bed 4 of the Ebenezer Formation. This stratigraphic information aligns with the observed morphological differences among the specimens and tentatively supports the significance of these variations. Needless to say, more specimens are needed to confirm. Lateral Gradation of the Ebenezer from Georgia to Florida - Fig. 3 from Weems and Edwards (2001) Ward (1992) has remarked that the period between Chesapecten santamaria (DN 9) and Chesapecten middlesexensis (DN 10) represents a considerable loss of the fossil record in the stratigraphic succession of chesapecten. These Chesapecten, which bear a strong overall resemblance to Chesapecten middlesexensis while displaying traits of preceding species (smaller hinge, more differentiated byssal fasicole), could help bridge this apparent gap. Notably, no other Chesapecten in this age range outside of Maryland and Virginia have been reported in the literature. Personal Remarks The equivalency of these shells to the St Mary’s Formation, not the Eastover formation is surprising to me given the strong resemblance to C. middlesexensis. If anyone knows of any findings correlating DN 8-9 to the Eastover, or of the Ebenezer to DN 10 please let me know. Also, if anyone has any additional samples of similar shells from similar sites, even in SC please let me know. Thank you! References de Verteuil, L., and Norris, G., 1996, Miocene dinoflagellate stratigraphy and systematics of Maryland and Virginia: Micropaleontology, vol. 42 (Supplement), 172 p. Huddlestun, P.F., 1988, A revision of the lithostratigraphic units of the coastal plain of Georgia; the Miocene through the Holocene: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin, no. 104, 162 p. Ward, L.W, 1992, Molluscan biostratigraphy of the Miocene, Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain of North America, VMNH Memoirs, no 2, 152p. Weems, R.E, Edwards, L.E., 2001, Geology of Oligocene, Miocene, and younger deposits in the Coastal Area of Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey, no 131, 129 p. Weems, R.E, Self-Trail J., Edwards, L.E., 2004, Supergroup stratigraphy of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains (Middle? Jurassic through Holocene, eastern North America): Southeastern Geology, volume 42, p 191-216